MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799810101 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2011-0017

STRUCTURAL SYNTHESIS OF ANCIENT CHINESE DRAWLOOM FOR PATTERN-WEAVING

2011· article· en· W2799810101 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanics and Biomechanics Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeavingMechanism (biology)GeneralizationComputer scienceSubject (documents)Foundation (evidence)Process (computing)Raising (metalworking)Work (physics)Engineering drawingEngineeringMechanical engineeringEpistemologyHistoryWorld Wide WebPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work synthesizes the mechanism structures of the drawloom for pattern-weaving, which was illustrated unclearly in many ancient Chinese literatures. Based on the analysis of mechanism, the structural characteristics and design constraints of the mechanism with uncertain members and joints are concluded. Then, according to the concepts of generalization and specialization subject to the concluded design constraints, all feasible structures of mechanism that meet the technological standards of the subject’s time period are reconstructed including 16 and 8 design concepts for the heddle foot-falling device and the heddle foot-raising device, respectively. This reconstruction process provides a logical foundation to deal with the issue of the ancient mechanical drawings with uncertain members and joints.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it